Speculation: Gary Mason on the Canucks and the Offseason

[The Horvatian One]

Whats going to happen with the Canucks this off season?
.
-Some intriguing things he has been picking up is 1 concerning AV. Great debate on whether he should go or should not go. Some genuine frustration among ownership this season in terms of coaching decisions that were being made. A couple that frustrated Franceso were Jason Garrison not being put on the PP. Another was the use of some of the young kids ie. putting Zack Kassian on the fourth line. Mason does not think firing AV was a hard sell to the Aquilini's.

Is it a gimme the ownership group will be ok with buyouts?

Mason believes buyouts are a non starter. There is a belief within Gillis and the Aquilini fam that there is a better player in Keith than most have seen and that it was a coaching problem. He is saying that he is willing to bet anything that Ballard will be here at the start of the year. Same with David Booth. Aquilini's do not like to burn money and he would be shocked if Ballard or Booth are bought out.

Does the ownership meddle or make suggestions?

They make suggestions and Franceso lets his opinion be known to Gillis but they don't meddle. There was a feeling that this was an unusual year and that Gillis was distracted by stuff off the ice but he doesnt believe there is any stress whatsoever in the relationship between Aquilini and Gillis. Mason believes it is as solid as ever.

Mason would not be surprised if a big player is moved and that he would not be surprised if they traded Luongo but sweetened that deal with someone such as Edler in hopes that the Canucks will get a good thing back.

He said he would keep his eye out for some sort of big package. There is a frustration surrounded with the defense in general and specifically Edler. There is a feeling the D took a step back this year.

Click to read more...

 

[Castle1*]

Whats going to happen with the Canucks this off season?
.
-Some intriguing things he has been picking up is 1 concerning AV. Great debate on whether he should go or should not go. Some genuine frustration among ownership this season in terms of coaching decisions that were being made. A couple that frustrated Franceso were Jason Garrison not being put on the PP. Another was the use of some of the young kids ie. putting Zack Kassian on the fourth line. Mason does not think firing AV was a hard sell to the Aquilini's.

Is it a gimme the ownership group will be ok with buyouts?

Mason believes buyouts are a non starter. There is a belief within Gillis and the Aquilini fam that there is a better player in Keith than most have seen and that it was a coaching problem. He is saying that he is willing to bet anything that Ballard will be here at the start of the year. Same with David Booth. Aquilini's do not like to burn money and he would be shocked if Ballard or Booth are bought out.

Does the ownership meddle or make suggestions?

They make suggestions and Franceso lets his opinion be known to Gillis but they don't meddle. There was a feeling that this was an unusual year and that Gillis was distracted by stuff off the ice but he doesnt believe there is any stress whatsoever in the relationship between Aquilini and Gillis. Mason believes it is as solid as ever.

Mason would not be surprised if a big player is moved and that he would not be surprised if they traded Luongo but sweetened that deal with someone such as Edler in hopes that the Canucks will get a good thing back.

He said he would keep his eye out for some sort of big package. There is a frustration surrounded with the defense in general and specifically Edler. There is a feeling the D took a step back this year.

And this Gary Mason knows this how?

 

[luongo321]

Aquaman was thinking the same thing as the majority of the online canucks community. AV is a tool.

 

[VeteranNetPresence]

ugh, hopefully this guy is wrong and there will be a buyout or two
sighz

 

[thepuckmonster]

If we keep Ballard and move Edler I'm going to lose my ****.

 

[The Horvatian One]

And this Gary Mason knows this how?

He is pretty connected since he used to write for the Sun.

 

[west in the east]

If we keep Ballard and move Edler I'm going to lose my ****.

Depends on what elder brings back. No doubt he would land a lot more than a Ballard buyout. Deal from a theoretical strength to help the weakness up front.

 

[iFan]

Yikes, move Edler to keep Ballard.... Thats a risky move. I like Ballard and I do see a better player there but its really risky, if we're moving Edler in the deal a young center better be on its way back.

Hamhuis Bieksa
Ballard Garrison
Alberts Tanev

With Corrado getting the calls up, I guess it's not bad

 

[CanaFan]

Whats going to happen with the Canucks this off season?
.
-Some intriguing things he has been picking up is 1 concerning AV. Great debate on whether he should go or should not go. Some genuine frustration among ownership this season in terms of coaching decisions that were being made. A couple that frustrated Franceso were Jason Garrison not being put on the PP. Another was the use of some of the young kids ie. putting Zack Kassian on the fourth line. Mason does not think firing AV was a hard sell to the Aquilini's.

Is it a gimme the ownership group will be ok with buyouts?

Mason believes buyouts are a non starter. There is a belief within Gillis and the Aquilini fam that there is a better player in Keith than most have seen and that it was a coaching problem. He is saying that he is willing to bet anything that Ballard will be here at the start of the year. Same with David Booth. Aquilini's do not like to burn money and he would be shocked if Ballard or Booth are bought out.

Does the ownership meddle or make suggestions?

They make suggestions and Franceso lets his opinion be known to Gillis but they don't meddle. There was a feeling that this was an unusual year and that Gillis was distracted by stuff off the ice but he doesnt believe there is any stress whatsoever in the relationship between Aquilini and Gillis. Mason believes it is as solid as ever.

Mason would not be surprised if a big player is moved and that he would not be surprised if they traded Luongo but sweetened that deal with someone such as Edler in hopes that the Canucks will get a good thing back.

He said he would keep his eye out for some sort of big package. There is a frustration surrounded with the defense in general and specifically Edler. There is a feeling the D took a step back this year.

Huh, interesting. Nothing there surprises me, esp. the hesitancy to do buy-outs and the concern with the D and Edler in particular. He's been in my radar as the key to a big 'reset' and boost to the forwards. Can't really blame Aquilini for not wanting to toss buy-outs around like party favors like some fans seem to expect. Not crazy about using Edler to 'sweeten' a Luongo deal though. It's bad enough getting nothing back for Lu, can't believe we'd give up a valued asset just to get him off our hands FFS ...

 

[Canucker]

Depends on what elder brings back. No doubt he would land a lot more than a Ballard buyout. Deal from a theoretical strength to help the weakness up front.

Wouldn't bother me none if we did get a healthy return for Edler.

 

[Nuckles]

Is there a link for this?

 

[CanaFan]

If we keep Ballard and move Edler I'm going to lose my ****.

Well Edler brings back an asset. Ballard brings back nothing. How can you assess this without knowing what Edler returns? Seems like panic for panics sake ...

 

[Virtanen2Horvat]

Well if you think of it Eakins and if we get him he is good with young players so maybe he can get Booth going? Ballard I think he will have a more successful season with a new coach, I mean you can clearly tell that AV and Ballard didn't get along well. So this is what the lineup looks like so far if we keep them both.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Higgins-Kesler-Horton
Booth-Coutrier-Hansen
Pinni-Lain-Kassian (Lets just say my 4th lines will be random for now)

I would like to trade Edler and a 1st for Coutrier and a 1st.

Horton picked up on free agency if possible.

 

[CanaFan]

Well if you think of it Eakins and if we get him he is good with young players so maybe he can get Booth going? Ballard I think he will have a more successful season with a new coach, I mean you can clearly tell that AV and Ballard didn't get along well. So this is what the lineup looks like so far if we keep them both.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Higgins-Kesler-Horton
Booth-Coutrier-Hansen
Pinni-Lain-Kassian (Lets just say my 4th lines will be random for now)

I would like to trade Edler and a 1st for Coutrier and a 1st.

Horton picked up on free agency if possible.

I like that but can't see Horton ever signing here. Probably not a big fan of ours since Rome nearly ended his career. Like the Edler deal, would allow us to get a couple young forwards with big upside. Shinkaruk could be available at #11 and Lazar would be there for sure...

 

[Krnuckfan]

Is there a link for this?

It was an interview on the team 1040 with bmac and don.

http://www.teamradio.ca/podcast/104...r_May_28_Hour3_Powered_by_Kingsway_Honda~.mp3

Go to around the 31 minute mark

 

[The Horvatian One]

Is there a link for this?

Yeps

http://www.teamradio.ca/podcast/104...r_May_28_Hour3_Powered_by_Kingsway_Honda~.mp3

 

[MS]

If we keep both Ballard and Booth, and the cap does down by $6 million, this is going to be a very crap offseason.

Trade Luongo for nothing, sign Tanev, and fill out the roster with low-cost prospects, and we're basically at the cap. With a useful forward in Mason Raymond gone.

Yeah, you could trade Edler for a similarly-priced forward, but leaves the blueline looking utterly hopeless. 3 top-4 defenders, and one injury away from disaster.

In order to move forward, Ballard has to go.

 

[MS]

Yikes, move Edler to keep Ballard.... Thats a risky move. I like Ballard and I do see a better player there but its really risky, if we're moving Edler in the deal a young center better be on its way back.

Hamhuis Bieksa
Ballard Garrison
Alberts Tanev

With Corrado getting the calls up, I guess it's not bad

That's 'not bad' because it's bloody horrible.

Three guys capable of playing 20 minutes, and one of them is Bieksa. Nobody who can pass the puck, nobody who can play on the PP with any real effect. No chance of competing with a blueline looking like that.

 

[Wisp]

Jason Botchford over ruling a lot of what Mason is saying on twitter this evening. Says yes to moving Ballard (somehow) and no to moving Edler.


I don't like the guy, but I defer to botchford here given his connections and track record.

 

[biturbo19]

Whats going to happen with the Canucks this off season?
.
-Some intriguing things he has been picking up is 1 concerning AV. Great debate on whether he should go or should not go. Some genuine frustration among ownership this season in terms of coaching decisions that were being made. A couple that frustrated Franceso were Jason Garrison not being put on the PP. Another was the use of some of the young kids ie. putting Zack Kassian on the fourth line. Mason does not think firing AV was a hard sell to the Aquilini's.

Of all the things about AV to be frustrated with, Garrison not on the 1st PP Unit is one of the few 'consternation causing decisions' that actually made sense. As a LH shot (and only a shot, no playmaking ability whatsoever there) it made zero sense to have him out there with the Twins. It was tried, it didn't work at all, it screwed everything up even more. He was an outstanding fit on the 2nd unit, where he can be the focal point for 'less skilled' players and the entire unit can be centered around getting it back to Garrison for a big blast from the point and work off that.

Is it a gimme the ownership group will be ok with buyouts?

Mason believes buyouts are a non starter. There is a belief within Gillis and the Aquilini fam that there is a better player in Keith than most have seen and that it was a coaching problem. He is saying that he is willing to bet anything that Ballard will be here at the start of the year. Same with David Booth. Aquilini's do not like to burn money and he would be shocked if Ballard or Booth are bought out.

There may be a better player in Keith Ballard still, and yes he and AV were a terrible fit...it just didn't ever work. But if Ballard is going to 'reset' his career...i don't see how it would be here. That whole thing has just gone much too far down a dark path to come back to the light i think. And even the 'pre-Vancouver' Ballard at his best wasn't half the player Edler can be. Even tangentially considering those two as anything like 'interchangeables' is even more asinine than it was to consider Ballard as a replacement for Ehrhoff.

Booth, i understand the merits in not buying him out, and i certainly wouldn't do it either. At the very worst, Booth has to have some value around the league in trade, however marginal. But we're not going to get better value on the UFA market, and he hasn't been buried nearly as badly here as Ballard.

Mason would not be surprised if a big player is moved and that he would not be surprised if they traded Luongo but sweetened that deal with someone such as Edler in hopes that the Canucks will get a good thing back.

He said he would keep his eye out for some sort of big package. There is a frustration surrounded with the defense in general and specifically Edler. There is a feeling the D took a step back this year.

Great...so the idea there is, to water down the return for our most valuable defenceman by tacking Luongo's dead weight on to the deal? How on earth does that help us?

And if there's so much great frustration specifically around Edler...why did they give the guy a big new long-term deal? That doesn't make any sense. Are we evaluating Edler based on a shortened season now, but giving Ballard, Booth, etc. the benefit of the doubt over the long haul and expecting them to return to form, despite being just as bad as Edler in the recent term, and having nothing of the proven track record Edler has in Vancouver behind that? Just stupid.

If we keep Ballard and move Edler I'm going to lose my ****.

So we let Ehrhoff walk, keep Ballard. It goes disastrously wrong. Now there are suggestions that we move Edler and again...keep Ballard?

I'd lose my **** too if that happens.

Well if you think of it Eakins and if we get him he is good with young players so maybe he can get Booth going? Ballard I think he will have a more successful season with a new coach, I mean you can clearly tell that AV and Ballard didn't get along well. So this is what the lineup looks like so far if we keep them both.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Higgins-Kesler-Horton
Booth-Coutrier-Hansen
Pinni-Lain-Kassian (Lets just say my 4th lines will be random for now)

I would like to trade Edler and a 1st for Coutrier and a 1st.

Horton picked up on free agency if possible.

How on earth is that what 'the lineup looks like so far'? That's...not at all what it looks like 'so far'.

 

[opendoor]

If we keep both Ballard and Booth, and the cap does down by $6 million, this is going to be a very crap offseason.

Trade Luongo for nothing, sign Tanev, and fill out the roster with low-cost prospects, and we're basically at the cap. With a useful forward in Mason Raymond gone.

Even then it's still basically impossible. Even if they get Tanev at a very modest raise and a cheap backup they'd have under $4M to add 6 more guys. That'd require 6 guys at around league minimum just to keep Ballard. Gillis is stubborn, but not to that degree.

 

[WinterEmpire]

Jason Botchford over ruling a lot of what Mason is saying on twitter this evening. Says yes to moving Ballard (somehow) and no to moving Edler.


I don't like the guy, but I defer to botchford here given his connections and track record.

Track record? What track record? Like Gaborik to Vancouver confirmed or Luongo to Toronto 100% any day now?

Botchford is the biggest hack of them all

 

[MS]

Of all the things about AV to be frustrated with, Garrison not on the 1st PP Unit is one of the few 'consternation causing decisions' that actually made sense. As a LH shot (and only a shot, no playmaking ability whatsoever there) it made zero sense to have him out there with the Twins. It was tried, it didn't work at all, it screwed everything up even more. He was an outstanding fit on the 2nd unit, where he can be the focal point for 'less skilled' players and the entire unit can be centered around getting it back to Garrison for a big blast from the point and work off that.

Agreed.

It couldn't have hurt to have tried it a bit more, at times when the PP was really struggling, but Garrison is not a first-unit PP guy. Great player, but just doesn't have the vision for that role. As you say, he's perfectly suited for a second unit.

The fact that the coaching staff took so much heat over that is ridiculous.

Even then it's still basically impossible. Even if they get Tanev at a very modest raise and a cheap backup they'd have under $4M to add 6 more guys. That'd require 6 guys at around league minimum just to keep Ballard. Gillis is stubborn, but not to that degree.

Yup. The math doesn't work. You can't improve the team and keep Ballard at the same time, unless you want your defense to be absolutely awful.

 

[Canucker]

The compliance buyouts were implemented for teams like Vancouver in order to get to the lowered cap, I sincerely doubt Aquilini refuses to use them if Gillis can adequately justify the expense.

 

[iFan]

That's 'not bad' because it's bloody horrible.

Three guys capable of playing 20 minutes, and one of them is Bieksa. Nobody who can pass the puck, nobody who can play on the PP with any real effect. No chance of competing with a blueline looking like that.

Hey I don't even want to move Edler, cause he brings size and a legit #1 puck mover, I'm not for trading Edler as it just opens up a hole. I don't think Bieksa at the 20 min mark is bad, Bieksa at 30+ mins is bad, I do think there is more to Ballard, he was our best D man in the playoffs the year before vs LA and a case in that seasons reg games, him and Tanev are a good fit but moving Edler in favor for Ballard is pretty risky and like you said hard to believe that D could win it all and I could see a size issue with that D in the new division. I get why Edler could be out there cause how do you justify moving Luongo, Ballard and Booth for nothing and not address scoring issues on the Canucks, Edlers return would fix that but its a hold on to your seats with that D core.

I hope we keep Edler cause Edler, Hamhuis and Garrison is a solid makeup for a D core and Garrison and Edler bring in some size, although you'd wish they'd use it more. I'd see if the Sens would deal Turris for Bieksa, Bieksa has value and is a hard nose good Canadian kid, Sens could use a D man like Bieksa and Turris would be a solid fit for the 3rd line center with top 6 duties as injuries hit.